6 nations predictions

[fivepointer]

I think Ireland will win but no grand slam.
England likely to come 2nd or 3rd.
Italy to lose all their games.
France have the talent to make a real mark - but i've been saying that for years and nothing much happens. Maybe this year...
All the teams (bar Italy) have the potential to produce a big performance so I expect this to be a very close Championship.
Away wins to be at a premium and BP's could be decisive.

[Scrumhead]

I agree with all of that.

I don’t see there being a Grand Slam and I can imagine it going down to the final day with England, Ireland and Wales all on 4 wins each.

[Puja]

I can see an Irish grand slam without actually looking massively convincing at times. They'll scrape by us by about 4 points, beat Scotland by dint of Scotland having no fit players left, thump Italy and France, and then ease past Wales. I think Italy will suprise at least one team, possibly even Scotland in round 1 if luck is with them and the Scots are complacent. France will fail to kick into gear again, and we'll edge past Wales to take second place.

Puja

[Oakboy]

Is it impossible for us to win in Dublin? Take out the last 12 months and we'd go there expecting to do just that. I believe that even with the last 12 months' experience our best team prepared to the best extent ought to be confident of winning. Will we? Not with Jones.

The hardest match to predict is Wales v Ireland in Cardiff. I think Wales will win. Ireland may sneak the title even so with Wales 2nd and us 3rd.

[francoisfou]

Many say it's Ireland's to lose, but there are sure to be some twists and turns along the way.
Wales and Ireland will fancy their chances but both only have two home games, although Italy away won't cause sleepless nights. Wales, however, will surely have tough games in Paris and Edinburgh.
It could all boil down to the last Saturday when they meet in Cardiff.
As for France, as fivepointer says in the first post, they have talented players, but will they get it together as a team? If they win their home games against Wales (first up this Friday evening!) and Scotland then they could be in with a chance, and I wouldn't put it past them to turn over England at HQ!

[Puja]

Is it impossible for us to win in Dublin?

Impossible? No. And I do think we are too pessimistic at times on here. However, at the moment, I'll pick them to win, simply because we're blatantly going to pick a midfield of Farrell, Te'o, Tuilagi, and I don't think we can get enough forward superiority over Ireland to win without using our backs at all.

Puja

[Oakboy]

Is it impossible for us to win in Dublin?

Impossible? No. And I do think we are too pessimistic at times on here. However, at the moment, I'll pick them to win, simply because we're blatantly going to pick a midfield of Farrell, Te'o, Tuilagi, and I don't think we can get enough forward superiority over Ireland to win without using our backs at all.

Puja

You must accept your share of pessimism floating the idea of that trio. Bloody hell, add on Youngs at 9 and Daly at 15 and we might as well throw the towel in. The crazy thing is, you are probably right. Even crazier is that Robson, Ford, Devoto, Slade and Brown in the corresponding positions could be dangerous, especially with Daly back on the wing where he always should have been.

[Scrumhead]

Is it impossible for us to win in Dublin?

Impossible? No. And I do think we are too pessimistic at times on here. However, at the moment, I'll pick them to win, simply because we're blatantly going to pick a midfield of Farrell, Te'o, Tuilagi, and I don't think we can get enough forward superiority over Ireland to win without using our backs at all.

Puja

I agree. I’ve said a few times that I think we have the capability to win in Dublin, but I doubt that we actually will. It would be great for the tournament if we did.

[Puja]

Is it impossible for us to win in Dublin?

Impossible? No. And I do think we are too pessimistic at times on here. However, at the moment, I'll pick them to win, simply because we're blatantly going to pick a midfield of Farrell, Te'o, Tuilagi, and I don't think we can get enough forward superiority over Ireland to win without using our backs at all.

Puja

You must accept your share of pessimism floating the idea of that trio. Bloody hell, add on Youngs at 9 and Daly at 15 and we might as well throw the towel in. The crazy thing is, you are probably right. Even crazier is that Robson, Ford, Devoto, Slade and Brown in the corresponding positions could be dangerous, especially with Daly back on the wing where he always should have been.

That's not pessimism, just resignation to our fate!

Puja

[fivepointer]

I wouldnt rule out us winning in Dublin. Its perfectly possible we can win the game, but realistically Ireland will be favourites.
Just as we might win in Dublin, we may lose in Cardiff and possibly at home to France if they get off to a good start.
A lot of these games are going to be close calls, i reckon.

[Stom]

So, it's Dublin. 62nd minute. We've been utterly toothless in attack but solid in defense. Ireland haven't found a way through but find themselves 6 points to the good thanks to some indiscretions on our part (12-6). But then comes the moment that changes the face of the 6N. Owen Farrell swears at the ref and is instantly sent off. Sexton kicks the penalty to give Ireland a 9 point cushion.

But we don't implode and replacement Ford creates a try out of nothing for Tuilagi.

Farrell is banned for the whole tournament and we end up taking the title after 4 HUGE BP wins, scoring a record number of tries. Ford takes home the Man of the Tournament for his role, giving the most assists, while Jonny May is the top try scorer.

Unfortunately, for the first warm up game, Farrell returns at 10 and we suddenly fail to score a try again...

[Oakboy]

I wouldnt rule out us winning in Dublin. Its perfectly possible we can win the game, but realistically Ireland will be favourites.
Just as we might win in Dublin, we may lose in Cardiff and possibly at home to France if they get off to a good start.
A lot of these games are going to be close calls, i reckon.

Yes, I can't argue with your assessment.

For us to win in Dublin, Jones has to select and prepare a team with more skill than he has shown so far. We have to get discipline right to the extent that Ireland concede more penalties than us even with an inconsistent French referee. That requires a fair shift based on our previous record under Jones. We have to get on-field judgement calls right. Finally, we have to get our forwards playing as a consistently tight unit that can hold the ball through multi-phase play to force Ireland's forwards to get frustrated.

There is hope!

[Stom]

I wouldnt rule out us winning in Dublin. Its perfectly possible we can win the game, but realistically Ireland will be favourites.
Just as we might win in Dublin, we may lose in Cardiff and possibly at home to France if they get off to a good start.
A lot of these games are going to be close calls, i reckon.

Yes, I can't argue with your assessment.

For us to win in Dublin, Jones has to select and prepare a team with more skill than he has shown so far. We have to get discipline right to the extent that Ireland concede more penalties than us even with an inconsistent French referee. That requires a fair shift based on our previous record under Jones. We have to get on-field judgement calls right. Finally, we have to get our forwards playing as a consistently tight unit that can hold the ball through multi-phase play to force Ireland's forwards to get frustrated.

There is hope!

I disagree. I think our chances of winning are directly proportional to the number of minutes Ford is on the pitch. If he does not play, we lose, as Farrell is at 10. If he plays 80 minutes, we win, as Farrell is not at 10.

[twitchy]

Ireland nailed on grand slam. After that it's very hard to predict. I reckon wales have the kinder fixtures while we have the tougher.

1 - ireland
2 - wales

Not sure after that.

[Renniks]

I'm holding out hope that Farrell, Te'o, Tuilagi works really smoothly…

That it creates extra gaps, and that Youngs plays his sniping game much more because of it

Getting us on the front foot, and him excited about getting to the ruck earlier and using the ball quicker

I'm also hoping that it creates a lot of space on the wing, and that we ignore the idea of passing down the line to get round the corner, but more that we just have the pace to go round people - picking May and Daly as wingers to help this

[francoisfou]

[

I disagree. I think our chances of winning are directly proportional to the number of minutes Ford is on the pitch. If he does not play, we lose, as Farrell is at 10. If he plays 80 minutes, we win, as Farrell is not at 10.

Can't argue with that!

[p/d]

Scotland to win. Clean sweep on home turf and only failing against England on their travels, due to the wrecking ball that goes by the name of Shields

Jones’ band of merrymen outdo themselves to finish fourth

[Oakboy]

I think our chances of winning are directly proportional to the number of minutes Ford is on the pitch. If he does not play, we lose, as Farrell is at 10. If he plays 80 minutes, we win, as Farrell is not at 10.

I've been thinking about that. It's hard to be objective whenever Farrell gets mentioned. Just about the whole world outside this board thinks he is the bees' knees.

You, Stom, and others, on and off the board, rate Ford highly. I don't. He has the physical skill-set and some of his passing is poetry. There it stops, for me. I just don't think he has the character and competitive mentality to a sufficient extent to run an international team consistently for 80 minutes. I've tried to convince myself that he has but can't. I did advocate Ford at 10 with the captaincy but subsequently concluded that he could not do the job adequately.

I can't stand Jones but (assuming that he won't pick Cipriani, as he should IMO) he might be right in starting Farrell at 10 with Ford on the bench. Of course, he needs to go a step further and be objective about what has happened for 60 minutes (or whatever) if and when he brings Ford on. That, more often than not, should mean a straight swap at 10, not a shuffle with Farrell moving to IC.

Having said all that, I can't get my head around Youngs, Farrell, T'eo, Tuilagi starting as appears likely. I would not like to be a back rower with that group buggering up the limited breakdown possession that was achieved. What concerns me further with that thought is that Jones may decide there is no point in starting Curry and opt for Shields, Wilson at 6/7.

Back to the Ford debate, assuming a back row of Wilson, Curry and BV, could Ford be risked at 10 with a more constructive centre pairing? Farrell/Tuilagi does nothing for me, especially if Youngs is at 9. If Ford were to be risked, I think Jones would have to go the whole hog and pick Robson, Ford, Slade, Tuilagi. Unless Youngs, Farrell and T'eo all get injured, Jones would just never take that risk.

[Stom]

I think our chances of winning are directly proportional to the number of minutes Ford is on the pitch. If he does not play, we lose, as Farrell is at 10. If he plays 80 minutes, we win, as Farrell is not at 10.

I've been thinking about that. It's hard to be objective whenever Farrell gets mentioned. Just about the whole world outside this board thinks he is the bees' knees.

You, Stom, and others, on and off the board, rate Ford highly. I don't. He has the physical skill-set and some of his passing is poetry. There it stops, for me. I just don't think he has the character and competitive mentality to a sufficient extent to run an international team consistently for 80 minutes. I've tried to convince myself that he has but can't. I did advocate Ford at 10 with the captaincy but subsequently concluded that he could not do the job adequately.

I can't stand Jones but (assuming that he won't pick Cipriani, as he should IMO) he might be right in starting Farrell at 10 with Ford on the bench. Of course, he needs to go a step further and be objective about what has happened for 60 minutes (or whatever) if and when he brings Ford on. That, more often than not, should mean a straight swap at 10, not a shuffle with Farrell moving to IC.

Having said all that, I can't get my head around Youngs, Farrell, T'eo, Tuilagi starting as appears likely. I would not like to be a back rower with that group buggering up the limited breakdown possession that was achieved. What concerns me further with that thought is that Jones may decide there is no point in starting Curry and opt for Shields, Wilson at 6/7.

Back to the Ford debate, assuming a back row of Wilson, Curry and BV, could Ford be risked at 10 with a more constructive centre pairing? Farrell/Tuilagi does nothing for me, especially if Youngs is at 9. If Ford were to be risked, I think Jones would have to go the whole hog and pick Robson, Ford, Slade, Tuilagi. Unless Youngs, Farrell and T'eo all get injured, Jones would just never take that risk.

I just want to ask again: what gives you that impression?

England's performances with Ford at 10 have generally been better than without. And he may well have a good win %age at 10, maybe even the best for a 10 who's played more than 20 games?

There you are: 80.95 when he starts at 10 or comes on at 10 without Farrell moving to 12. Drops to 74.5 when you include those 9 instances of him coming off the bench and Farrell moving to 12.

Which means...5 of 9 games where he's come on, with Farrell moving to 12, we've lost.

Interestingly, he also has a 100% record as captain, and a 33% record with Farrell as captain. In fact, our best performances in the last 4 years have all come with Ford at 10.

So, why do you remain unconvinced?

[Stom]

The stats: http://en.espn.co.uk/statsguru/rugby/pl ... ype=player

[Oakboy]

The stats: http://en.espn.co.uk/statsguru/rugby/pl ... ype=player

I can't associate with those stats as well as you. How often has Ford been at 10 without Farrell on the pitch in important matches? Win percentages only count if the matches matter. Maybe, I could argue that Cipriani has the best recent record in matches that matter from the SA tour.

Don't get me wrong. I want to be convinced. I share the opinion that Farrell limits the team and is massively overrated. Unfortunately, starting from where we are at, I just don't think there is a platform within which Ford can do what is required. Had Slade been in the 12 shirt for a good run and proved he owned it, had Tuilagi not been injured and been in the 13 shirt, had Jones found a realistic alternative for the 9 shirt as should have been his No 1 priority etc. etc.

Reluctantly, within the parameters of the base set-up that Jones has manufactured, I conclude that we can only play in a 'try not to lose' framework, packing our side with physicality and hoping to have sufficient pace in at least two of the back three positions to threaten out wide or in kick chases. I hate that style of rugby but within the current RWC cycle, I can't see enough time for the team to learn a new approach. That simply means Ford does not start because he has not proved that he is better than Farrell at running the team in that style whatever the statistics show.

Also, Ford has not shown, within opportunities limited by those picked around him, that he is such a skilful FH that we should play in a more expansive style. That is what I was hoping for.

[Puja]

Ford was at fly-half for all of our winning streak. Did none of those matches matter?

Puja

[Oakboy]

Ford was at fly-half for all of our winning streak. Did none of those matches matter?

Puja

Not now after our losing streak, no. In any case, that would only be an argument for Farrell at 12, surely?

[Stom]

Ford was at fly-half for all of our winning streak. Did none of those matches matter?

Puja

Not now after our losing streak, no. In any case, that would only be an argument for Farrell at 12, surely?

OK, then we can stop the Jonny love, as obviously he didn't have an impact on our WC win. It was all about Steve Thompson...

I know you just want to pick Cipriani, but if you cannot see the impact Ford has on a game of rugby...

He doesn't go missing, he just conducts. A FH shouldn't always be the centre of attention, he needs to allow others to be the centre of attention, too. He's the one who sees what's happening in the field of play and picks the moves to run. And it just so happens that with Ford at 10 we run a lot of backs moves, some of which lead to tries. While with Farrell at 10, we don't run many backs moves. And with Cirpriani at 10, we don't either, as he likes unstructured play the best.

I like to put it this way:

Ford creates moves the opposition can see coming but can't do anything about.
Cipriani creates moves the opposition cannot see coming.
Farrell...well our try scoring record with him at 10 is testament to his ability to create moves.

I like the structure Ford provides. Sexton does the same, but he's got some big advantages. He's older and wiser and has a world class SH inside him, even if you discount pure ability.

I much prefer that to the kind of play Cips creates. Or Barrett. Actually Barrett has a lot of similarities to Cipriani of 10 years ago.

[Raggs]

Cipriani is ridiculously structured... the reason he can pull off a lot of the no-look passes is because he knows the running lines everyone is on. He's so hard to play against because he can pick any of the 2/3 options available, based on the defence, whilst looking either at the defender, or at the other attacker, but the lines they're running are set.